MY SOUL is in twain. Two principles on which clued-in web folk heartily agree are coming more and more often into conflictāa conflict most recently thrust into relief by discussions around the brilliant Vox Media team, publishers of The Verge.
The two principles are:
- Building performant websites is not only a key differentiator that separates successful sites from those which donāt get read; itās also an ethical obligation, whose fulfillment falls mainly on developers, but can only happen with the buy-in of the whole team, from marketing to editorial, from advertising to design.
- Publishing and journalism are pillars of civilized society, and the opportunity to distribute news and information via the internet (and to let anyone who is willing to do the work become a publisher) has long been a foundational benefit of the web. As the sad, painful, slow-motion decline of traditional publishing and journalism is being offset by the rise of new, primarily web-based publications and news organizations, the need to sustain these new publications and organizationsāto āpay for the content,ā in popular parlanceāis chiefly being borne by advertising…which, however, pays less and less and demands more and more as customers increasingly find ways to route around it.
The conflict between these two principles is best summarized, as is often the case, by the wonderfully succinct Jeremy Keith (author, HTML5 For Web Designers). In his 27 July post, āOn The Verge,ā Jeremy takes us through prior articles beginning with Nilay Patelās Verge piece, āThe Mobile Web Sucks,ā in which Nilay blames browsers and a nonexistent realm he calls āthe mobile webā for the slow performance of websites built with bloated frameworks and laden with fat, invasive ad platformsālike The Verge itself.
āThe Vergeās Web Sucks,ā by Les Orchard, quickly countered Nilayās piece, as Jeremy chronicles (āLes Orchard says what weāre all thinkingā). Jeremy then points to a half-humorous letter of surrender posted by Vox Mediaās developers, who announce their new Vox Media Performance Team in a piece facetiously declaring performance bankruptcy.
A survey of follow-up barbs and exchanges on Twitter concludes Jeremyās piece (which you must read; do not settle for this sloppy summary). After describing everything that has so far been said, Mr Keith weighs in with his own opinion, and itās what you might expect from a highly thoughtful, open-source-contributing, standards-flag-flying, creative developer:
Iām hearing an awful lot of false dichotomies here: either you can have a performant website or you have a business model based on advertising. …
Tracking and advertising scripts are todayās equivalent of pop-up windows. …
For such a young, supposedly-innovative industry, Iām often amazed at what people choose to treat as immovable, unchangeable, carved-in-stone issues. Bloated, invasive ad tracking isnāt a law of nature. Itās a choice. We can choose to change.
Me, Iām torn. As a 20-year-exponent of lean web development (yes, I know how pretentious that sounds), I absolutely believe that the web is for everybody, regardless of ability or device. The webās strength lies precisely in its unique position as the worldās first universal platform. Tim Berners-Lee didnāt invent hypertext, and his (and his creationās) genius doesnāt lie in the deployment of tags; it subsists in the principle that, developed rightly, content on the web is as accessible to the Nigerian farmer with a feature phone as it is to a wealthy American sporting this yearās device. I absolutely believe this. Iāve fought for it for too many years, alongside too many of you, to think otherwise.
And yet, as a 20-year publisher of independent content (and an advertising professional before that), I am equally certain that content requires funding as much as it demands research, motivation, talent, and nurturing. Somebody has to pay our editors, writers, journalists, designers, developers, and all the other specialtists whose passion and tears go into every chunk of worthwhile web content. Many of you reading this will feel I’m copping out here, so let me explain:
It may indeed be a false dichotomy that āeither you can have a performant website or you have a business model based on advertisingā but it is also a truth that advertisers demand more and more for their dollar. They want to know what page you read, how long you looked at it, where on the web you went next, and a thousand other invasive things that make thoughtful people everywhere uncomfortableābut are the price we currently pay to access the earthās largest library.
I donāt like this, and I donāt do it in the magazine I publish, but A List Apart, as a direct consequence, will always lack certain resources to expand its offerings as quickly and richly as we’d like, or to pay staff and contributors at anything approaching the level that Vox Media, by accepting a different tradeoff, has achieved. (Let me also acknowledge ALA’s wonderful sponsors and our longtime partnership with The Deck ad network, lest I seem to speak from an ivory tower. Folks who’ve never had to pay for content cannot lay claim to moral authority on this issue; untested virtue is not, and so on.)
To be clear, Vox Media could not exist if its owners had made the decisions A List Apart made in terms of advertisingāand Vox Mediaās decisions about advertising are far better, in terms of consumer advocacy and privacy, than those made by most web publishing groups. Also to be clear, I don’t regret A List Apart’s decisions about advertisingāthey are right for us and our community.
I know and have worked alongside some of the designers, developers, and editors at Vox Media; youād be proud to work with any of them. I know they are painfully aware of the toll advertising takes on their siteās performance; I know they are also doing some of the best editorial and publishing work currently being performed on the webāwhich is what happens when great teams from different disciplines get together to push boundaries and create something of value. This super team couldnāt do their super work without salaries, desks, and computers; acquiring those things meant coming to some compromise with the state of web advertising today. (And of course it was the owners, and not the employees, who made the precise compromise to which Vox Media currently adheres.)
Put a gun to my head, and I will take the same position as Jeremy Keith. I’ll even do it without a gun to my head, as my decisions as a publisher probably already make clear. And yet, two equally compelling urgencies in my core beingālove of web content, and love of the webās potentialāmake me hope that web and editorial teams can work with advertisers going forward, so that one day soon we can have amazing content, brilliantly presented, without the invasive bloat. In the words of another great web developer I know, āHope is a dangerous currencyābut itās all Iāve got.ā